Tuesday, May 22, 2012

4 comments MMQB Review: No Time for NFL News, Peter Is Off to England Edition

Peter King visited his brother in England over this last weekend. It sounds like he had a good time. Presumably England has Starbucks with the exactly right amount of employees so there is never a long wait, there is always free coffee available no matter what time you wake up at your hotel, no person dares to do anything crazy on the trains like look at their laptop or listen to music, and rental cars companies don't overcharge you for gas simply because you are too lazy to get gas before turning the rental car back in. I assume this because Peter seems to have no complaints, other than the mild espresso (but the milk was great!). This week Peter ponders many things. England must be a very thought-provoking country. He ponders LeSean McCoy's new contract, what Drew Brees is worth, and apparently he pondered how to get other people to write 25% of the column for him by including commencement addresses in MMQB. Enough with the introduction, let's get to the recap of all-cricket related festivities.

Before I get on the plane home, a few football notes, a lesson from Rod Smith, some commencement fragments and what the NFL can learn from sports over here.

So the English crowd of 30,000 or so, many of the men in suits and the women in fine dresses and heels, politely clapped when the West Indies batsman, Adrian Barath, scored four runs. Sitting halfway up in the stands, I asked my brother why they were cheering.

"Because it was a good play,'' Ken, eight years my senior, said. "It's about sportsmanship. Barath's a good player. He might be from another country, but you appreciate good play.''

Here we go. It's a lesson in "American fans are too mean to the opposing team" from Peter King. Of course during the Olympics people are generally respectful and will cheer for an accomplishment by the opposing team, but I guess that doesn't count for this discussion. I'd like to focus on the difference between the audience for cricket and the audience for American sports like basketball, baseball or football. I have never attended a cricket match, but I'm assuming from what Peter has told us about the sport and the crowd, it is a much more gentlemanly sport, and the crowd reflects that, as compared to American football, baseball, or basketball. It isn't like an English crowd is a calm crowd that always shows appreciation for the opponent. For example, European soccer has a raucous crowd, much like many American sports have. When it comes to tennis or golf in the United States, a good performance is usually celebrated by the crowd no matter who their favorite golfer is. So short story long, I think the type of sport and not the crowd is the key to appreciating good play from the opposition.

What a concept ... appreciating good play from the opposition.

Chipper Jones is being honored in some way or another in nearly every city he plays a road series in during this summer. It's excessive at this point, but this is an example of an American crowd appreciating good play from the opposition. Of course I wouldn't expect Peter to know this since Chipper Jones doesn't play for the Red Sox. Another brief example...Cardinals fans in St. Louis are remarkable for cheering for their team, while also showing respect and admiration for the competition. Maybe it is just a reputation more than reality, but I feel like they appreciate good play from the opposition.

I'll get back to that in this unorthodox column (Monday Morning Wicket Keeper, a few of the Twitter Worldlies suggested I call it today), but let's go football first.

Yeah, let's get this whole "football discussion" out of the way. Monday Morning Quarterback is a weekly column about Peter's life of course, and in no way should be considered to be about the NFL. We are interested in Peter and his life, not any NFL-related news he could give us.

What the LeSean McCoy signing came down to for the Eagles.

Keeping another member of "the Dream Team" of course. Now they just have to sign Mike Vick to a nine-figure deal...wait, the Eagles already did that?

The most amazing thing about McCoy is not how precocious he's been in his first three seasons, averaging 1,414 yards from scrimmage a season. It's that he's 23.

This is very picky, but I don't like it when the word "precocious" is used to refer to a grown man. I know in terms of the actual definition of the word, it can be used in the way Peter is referencing it, but the modern usage is for a child. I feel like we, as a society, should stick to calling children "precocious."

The Eagles signed him to a five-year deal Thursday, and five-year deals for running backs are always dangerous. But Steven Jackson will take his first carry of this season for St. Louis at age 29, and Michael Turner is 30, and both could easily finish in the top five in the league in rushing this year. McCoy will take the last carry of this contract at age 28.

It's a great deal for the Eagles and LeSean McCoy gets paid. I love it when a plan comes together. I'm sure Matt Forte is thrilled to see McCoy getting paid and is not at all jealous or angry the Bears won't give him a long-term contract.

because a five-year contract for a back at age 25 (which is how old he'd be on opening day 2013) is riskier than a five-year contract for a back at age 24. It's mincing words, yes. But with backs, the longer you wait to pay them, the worse you sleep three and four years down the road.

Understandable, but I still don't know if a 25 year old back on a five year contract is that much of a risk. I think it is important to remember in the NFL there are non-guaranteed contracts, so if a 25 year old back signs a five year deal it can be structured so it won't hurt the team (financially) if his production begins declining prior to year four of the contract. So I wouldn't think a 25 year old back would be a huge risk, as compared to a 26-27 year old back. Those are the risky running back signings in my opinion because year three of their deal encompasses a time when most running backs seem to start a decline.

"Obviously there's an inherent risk in paying any player,'' Roseman said. "But if you're worried, and you're constantly conservative, you won't be able to build the kind of team that you hope can win a championship.''

I can't help but add the Eagles' aggressiveness, and lack of conservativeness, did not necessarily benefit the team last year. The Eagles were very aggressive in making some moves through trade and free agency. While they weren't Redskins-bad moves, these trades/signings didn't work out last year. Howie Roseman signed a 30+ year old injury prone quarterback to a $100 million deal in the last year as well. So I agree with what Roseman is saying, but there is a limit to the aggressiveness a team should show at times.

Even with my minor criticism aside, I think this is a great deal for the Eagles. McCoy will catch his normal 300 screen passes per season and get his typical 10 carries per game, while Mike Vick throws for a 55% completion rate when he is healthy (I'm kidding Eagles fans, please don't attempt to injure me). All will be well this year because the defense will play better and the Eagles will once again be in the playoff hunt.

So what's fair for Drew Brees?

Saint Brees? Brees should be able to name his price and the Saints should pay it. Ok, maybe that's a bit extreme, but the Saints need to re-sign him unless they are really, really high on Chase Daniel. I would say $20 million per year sounds about right...now about the amount of that money that will be guaranteed.

First, other than rookie receiver Nick Toon, no one should really care if Drew Brees is quarterbacking the Saints during Organized Team Activities, or during full-squad minicamps with the Saints...So with opening day 16 weeks from yesterday, I'm not going to be too concerned about Brees missing time until, say, about Aug. 20.

"I don't think it is a big deal if Brees misses any time until the very end of Training Camp. It doesn't matter if he and the Saints haven't come to a deal. That's why I'm bringing it up right now, in the middle of May and doing a very thorough analysis of the situation, because it is so not a big deal that Brees hasn't signed yet."

So let's keep in perspective the fact that Brees and the team are conflicted over the lack of a new contract.

Peter is missing the point I believe. The point isn't whether Brees can run the team effectively once he is signed, the point is the Saints are playing hardball with their best player and they can't come to a contract agreement. It's the perception and lack of resolution in not coming to a contract agreement with their best player that seems to be the issue. Drew Brees and Saints management don't seem to be on the same page when it comes to contract terms. It feels very contentious for some reason.

It's hard to look at this list and divine that Peyton Manning, over the past six years, has been $25.7 million better than Drew Brees, and Tom Brady $14.3 million better.

QBSuper Bowl WinsGames MissedComp. %Yds/SeasonTD-INTRatingNFL Earnings

Don't forget Brees won that Super Bowl for the Saints organization, which made everyone feel 100% better about Hurricane Katrina destroying the city. Brees saved the entire city with that Super Bowl victory, that has to count for something.

The Saints feel they should be credited for taking a medical risk with Brees in 2006. He was coming off serious shoulder reconstruction, and no team was willing to offer him $10 million a year. True.

We all know I think Peter is pretty self-involved at times, is on occasion too tight with NFL players to cover them appropriately, and he tends to complain about menial and trivial things as if he were the one person in the world who gets inconvenienced on a daily basis by the idiocy of other people. I am glad he wrote these two (two sentences and one word) sentences. This revisionist history about how Brees chose the Saints because he wanted to help rebuild the city of New Orleans and how the Dolphins and Chargers were just complete morons for not signing him to a larger deal is crap. The Saints offered the most guaranteed money for the longest amount of contract years and Brees liked Sean Payton, so Brees went to New Orleans. It was pretty much that simple.

But by almost any measure Brees outplayed his contract. He's been the most statistically productive quarterback, and he didn't miss any significant time;

Now the Saints want credit for taking a chance on Brees after he had major shoulder surgery and Brees isn't feeling as much love as he used to feel. I am on Brees' side on this one. The Saints got a hell of a deal for a while. Now is the time to pay up.

So what is Brees worth? He doesn't have the medical red flag of Manning. It's easy to argue he'll be healthier longer than either other player, obviously because he's younger, but also because he hasn't had anything notably wrong with him since the end of the 2005 season.

Ah yes, the kiss of death "He hasn't been injured very much during his career" comment.

Brees is younger, has been more durable, has been more productive ... and the Saints are entering a season unlike any a quarterback has ever had to pilot through, considering the suspensions and unrest in New Orleans. I think the Saints will pay him before the middle of August, and it'll be somewhere around $21 million a year. Looking at the precedents, that's only fair.

I have very little patience for these type of things. We know Brees will re-sign as a Saint. Bree has most of the leverage in this situation. Sure, the Saints could franchise him over these next two seasons and then let him leave as a free agent when he is 35 years old. This won't happen though. The Saints need to re-sign Brees and Brees has the leverage. Why wait until August to come to an agreement with Brees if you are the Saints? Are they playing hardball or thinking they can drive his price down? I don't see it happening. Pay him his $100 million now and get some good press over the summer, rather than let this drag out. We know both sides will come to an agreement. The Saints should not posture or drag this out and just come to an agreement with Brees.

I knew Jim Miller when he worked for three teams in the NFL -- including the Saints as contract negotiator and vice president of administration -- before he changed paths and took the athletic director's job at the University of New Orleans in 2003.

Peter asked this gentleman to provide some insight into the contract negotiations between Brees and the Saints. This is a large section written by someone else, along with another large section of commencement addresses written by other people that was included in this MMQB. I feel like Peter sometimes think he has to make MMQB very long, when I wish he would sometimes make it shorter and more concise. Yes, I realize I write a lot and I am not concise, but I see nothing wrong with a shorter and more concise MMQB.

Sometimes contracts are delivered on a velvet pillow. After I left the Saints, I was chief negotiator for the Chicago Bears, during which time we drafted linebacker Brian Urlacher. When I met Urlacher's agent for the first time, he shocked me by saying the contract must be signed before July 1, a full three weeks before camp opened. His reason? Urlacher was betrothed to a woman the agent did not trust. Under applicable law, any property brought into the marriage by either party before July 1 was not subject to community property laws which were triggered by the matrimonial vows. The agent wanted to protect the signing bonus in the event the marriage failed. Urlacher became the first player in the 2000 NFL draft to sign a contract, and he did eventually divorce his wife.

Sorry for the wall of text, but when some people rag on agents for being money-hungry, thieving jerks who belong at the bottom of the ocean, I like to know stories about how an agent saved his player a great amount of money. Urlacher's agent definitely knew what he was doing and this is a good example of why players need agents.

Six years ago, the Saints took a chance on an injured quarterback and became the beneficiary of what turned out to be a major bargain. Now it's time to consider back pay, rolled into a long-term contract that would give Brees the highest all-time average per year while Condon gives the Saints some relief on when it is earned.

You aren't supposed to negotiate like this and be able to stay a good guy like Brees tries to do, but the Saints should be happy Brees never held out or wanted a new contract during the past six seasons. He has been underpaid for a few years now. If I am Drew Brees, then I am somewhat insulted the Saints have even let it get to this point...unless Brees has been requesting such outrageous numbers the Saints had to turn the requested contract terms down due to the outrageousness of the contract demands. Saint Brees would never do that though, would he?

The symposium will be held at a hotel in Aurora, Ohio, with the NFC rookies meeting from June 24-27, and the AFC rookies gathering from June 27-30. On the last day of each session, rookies will spend a half-day at the Hall of Fame, 45 minutes away, taking a two-hour tour, watching a 20-minute football history film, and listening to a Hall of Famer speak about the lessons of the past.

I've found it amazing when players give you a blank stare when you ask the kind of question about a famous player from the '50s or '60s who any good fan in the street would know -- and the current player doesn't.

Really? Is this amazing? The NFL has a rich history, but a famous player from the 50's or 60's played a solid three or four decades before some of these rookies were even born. Most of the NFL players aren't busy studying the history of the NFL and are too busy playing the game of football as they grow up. It may be kind of odd a player wouldn't know who Bart Starr is, but I am not sure Peter should be amazed by it.

(tries out old man's voice) We all know kids these days don't respect history, so it shouldn't shock anyone these yellow-bellied, war-evading whippersnappers don't know much about the NFL's history. They are too busy listening to their rap music loudly with the windows down.

My brother lives about an hour north of London in the countryside, and he's forever wanted me to come over to see cricket. No time like this quiet NFL offseason to break away. So we set off on the train Saturday morning for Day 3 of the five-day test match between England and the West Indies.

"While on the train, I saw a young couple giggling to each other while pointing at a computer FOR OVER AN HOUR! I can't imagine what was so funny that these young kids were laughing so much. I wish an attendant had asked them to quiet down as their constant laughing was reverberating through the passenger car and it almost broke my concentration as I stared at them."

Then we connected with the Tube on the outskirts of London and got to Lord's, in a nice London Neighborhood, about 10.

"I've never heard so many people speak with a British accent!"





Lots of those in a test match. It starts at 11 in the morning and runs until 1. Players and fans stop for lunch for 40 minutes. The second session is from 1:40 to 3:40. Then they stop for tea. (Or, in my case, beer.) The third session is from 4 to 6. Strange atmosphere in the stadium. At precisely 11, with no warning from the PA announcer or the scoreboard, play began. Just started. Through the day, I kept waiting for music, or loud videos, or something on the scoreboard. Nothing.

But without the PA announcer telling everyone when to cheer how will everyone know when to cheer? Without halftime entertainment, what is there to do to entertain yourself while at the game? With no overdone introductions how will everyone get excited for the sporting event?

Neil bought us tickets to the hospitality tent, where lunch was served. Cerviche of halibut, it was called (cold fish), with seared chicken breast and French wine. Would Jerry Jones serve Cerviche of halibut at Jerryworld?

More importantly, would Cowboys fans eat fish with seared chicken breast and French wine at a football game? Probably not. The atmosphere at a football game is simply different than the atmosphere at a cricket match. The atmosphere at a polo match in the United States is also different from the atmosphere at a football game. Maybe a polo match and a cricket match like the one Peter attended are a better comparison. Peter could probably find a similar experience at a sporting event here in the United States if he really wanted to. Football just has a different atmosphere and I could not imagine eating fish at a football game.

We settled in for the afternoon session. There was an instant replay review of a close play, and Neil extolled the virtues of this replay system versus the NFL's. "Here, if you call for a review, and you're right, you don't get penalized -- you can keep reviewing calls if you're right,'' he said. "In the NFL, if you've exhausted your replay reviews, and you see an obviously wrong call, you can't challenge. That's bollocks.''

Bad, he meant.

Thanks for clarifying that Peter. I am an idiot and have no clue about how other countries live or talk. When someone says they are going to the "loo," I just always assume they are going to St. Louis...it has always been weird to me when that person who goes to the "loo" returns within the next five minutes.

Then it was over. No big announcement. We got up, walked out, and I suggested that since Abbey Road was so close, we should find it and walk the most famous crosswalk in the world.

I'm sure no one else had this idea.

Funny thing is, about 40 or 50 people had the same idea at 7:15 on a Saturday evening.

What? You mean 40 or 50 people out of 30,000 people who attended the cricket match chose to to walk the most famous crosswalk in the world? What are the odds of his happening? A million-to-one?

So we waited as Beatles nerd after Beatles nerd did their best John-Ringo-Paul-George imitation. Too young to know what I'm talking about? Google "Abbey Road album cover.''

Talk down to me more, Peter! What is a "road?" Where do I find this "Google" person? Are John-Ringo-Paul-George famous people of some sort?

On Sunday evening, Ken asked me what I wanted to do Monday before he dropped me off at Heathrow around 3. "Let's go to the match,'' I said. Why not? Ten pounds apiece. So we'll go until lunch.

An actually interesting England-related tidbit would have been if Peter told us how much 10 pounds converted to in dollars. That way I could compare the cost of an NFL game to the cost of a cricket match. If I am looking to learn something English/cricket-related that would help me gain a new perspective on the NFL, then information on how much 10 pounds would be in dollars would be nice to know. At least I am reminded what "bollocks" and "Abbey Road" are...I guess.

Highlights from some of the college commencement speeches around the country this month:

As if sitting through your own college's commencement address wasn't boring and tedious enough. Perhaps I didn't have an interesting enough commencement speaker at my graduation.

I think commencement addresses are more interesting to read than to hear. They do make for a good way to kill space in a football column though.

If you liked the passages, great. If not, I understand; this is a football column, not The Chronicle of Higher Education. But this is who I am, which I guess, if you've been reading this column for a while, you understand. Thanks for indulging me.

Fine, I'll let it pass this one time without further criticism. But only because Peter mentioned no team other than the Saints were offering Brees more than $10 million per season earlier in this MMQB.

Biggest reason why the Arizona Cardinals picked wide receiver Michael Floyd in the first round last month? The numbers say it all. If you're going to employ Larry Fitzgerald, and you're going to pay him ($16 million per year) like he's the best receiver in football, you had best not put him out on an island with inaccurate passers.

And here I criticized this pick falsely believing that Michael Floyd was a wide receiver and not a quarterback. I didn't realize the solution to the Cardinals QB issues was to draft another wide receiver.

So now the Cardinals have one great receiver and one potentially really good receiver with an inaccurate passer. Things are much, much better now! Now Kevin Kolb has two competent receivers to miss with wide open passes. Rejoice Cardinals fans!

Not that Floyd is going to fix the accuracy issues. But he should deflect some of the attention from Fitzgerald so the quarterback -- whoever it is -- can have a better chance to play well.

Because at the beginning of the 2012 NFL season opposing defensive coordinators will say, "We need to make sure this rookie wide receiver doesn't beat us, so let's move some coverage off of Larry Fitzgerald." Floyd will have to prove himself before this happens. Not to be to put too fine of a point on it, but the Cardinals' quarterback (whoever it is) is going to have to prove he can be accurate with the football. I just don't see Floyd as a cure for taking coverage off Fitzgerald without Floyd showing he can be a weapon in the offense first. I like Michael Floyd, I still don't know if I like this pick.

In 2010 and 2011, Arizona quarterbacks have been last, collectively, in football, completing 53.3 percent of their throws. Over those two years, Fitzgerald has caught 52.0 percent of the passes thrown his way. If you don't think there's a direct correlation between Fitzgerald's receiving percentage plummeting since Warner left, you haven't been watching the Cardinals play.

Which is why I think the problems aren't with the receiver on the other side of Fitzgerald, but lies with who is throwing Fitzgerald the ball. Seems to me Fitzgerald's success in 2012 depends more on the quarterback throwing him the ball than anything else.

"Said it before and I'll say it again: The Super Bowl in New Orleans this year will be the most awkward SB week in the history of the league''

-- @wingoz, ESPN host Trey Wingo.

Agreed, Trey. Roger Goodell should bring his earplugs.

Roger Goodell may need to bring a bodyguard with him everywhere he goes during that week. The way he screwed the Saints team over for daring to punish them for breaking NFL rules, what fan base wouldn't be mad at the commissioner for enforcing NFL rules and handing down punishments when that team breaks those rules?

1. I think there's one thing I don't get about Jonathan Vilma: how he has as his Twitter avatar the Sports Illustrated cover, screaming "Bounty Culture'' with Vilma front and center, very big, jumping out on the cover. If being degraded by being identified with the bounty story is a sue-able offense for Vilma, and if he accuses Roger Goodell of disparaging his character to the point where it's going to be difficult for him to ever find work in or out of the NFL, why does he identify himself with something so reprehensible? How on the one hand can you want something like the SI cover representing you to the Internet world, and on the other hand you sue the man responsible for allegedly making you so infamous?

Quit bringing up logical and relevant points Peter. Don't you see how the NFL has disparaged Jonathan Vilma by suggesting he won't find work after the NFL? A man has got to eat and the millions Vilma has made playing in the NFL just won't support him at the standard of living he wants to keep up. His last contract was only signed for $34 million with only $17 million guaranteed.

4. I think I have only one piece of advice for the Wilfs, in the wake of the news about the new Vikings stadium being approved and on schedule to open in 2016, and as it concerns whether to fork out the extra dough to cap the place with a retractable roof rather than a permanent one: Do it. Bite the bullet. You'll never regret it, especially on beautiful autumn October Sundays when it's cloudless and 48 degrees outside. And one other piece of advice: Make sure Christian Ponder, or whoever the quarterback in 2016 is, isn't one of those indoor-loving guys who will want the roof closed all the time.

Yes, Wilf family. Find out now if Christian Ponder isn't going to be the quarterback in 2016, and if he isn't, then jump in your time machine and find out who will be the quarterback in the year 2016 and ask this person if he prefers the roof be closed all the time or not. All you need is a time machine to jump four years in the future to find out who the Vikings starting quarterback will be and then build the roof on your new stadium based on whether he prefers an open or closed roof.

7. I think the Baltimore Ravens must get driven absolutely nuts by Ed Reed between February and July.

Yes, but he is worth it from August to January.

a. Most depressing in-flight movie in the history of in-flight movies: Young Adult, with Charlize Theron. You're too good to play cheesy and creepy, Charlize -- especially when the script drags and the story's lousy. Sheesh.

Now if Meryl Streep played that role...well let's just say Peter King would recommend an Oscar nomination for her. What a chameleon that Meryl Streep is.

I enjoyed "Young Adult" and I know people who are slightly like Charlize Theron's character who are still living life like they are in high school. I thought the characterization of a person who can't put high school achievements and relationships behind them was fairly spot-on. Maybe the script dragged a little at times, but I don't think the story was lousy. How is Theron too good to play cheesy and creepy? It's called "acting" for a reason.

h. Al Michaels, for all the L.A. Kings pain he's endured over the years, must be happy to be watching the best team in hockey. You didn't know Al was a two-decade Kings' season-ticket holder?

Only Peter King would assume some people don't know what Abbey Road is and then have mock surprise when his readers don't know that Al Michaels is a L.A. Kings fan. This is part of the trend I see in Peter's writing where he will assume his readers have more access to the coaches/players he covers than they actually do. It's much like the comments we will get in MMQB where Peter will discuss a topic and then write, "Ask Joe Philbin if Matt Flynn can play in the NFL," as if his readers have regular conversations with Coach/Player X (in this example Joe Philbin) to ask this question.

k. Imagine the Thunder and the Kings winning the NBA and the NHL, respectively. What odds would you have gotten for that daily winter-pro-sports double last September?

For the Oklahoma City Thunder portion of this double I don't think it would have been speculative to see them win the NBA Title this year. The L.A. King are another matter.

l. Mike Aviles, Jarrod Saltalamacchia. Keepers of the Sox flame.

(Vomits into a trash can)

m. At some point, we're going to have to take the Orioles seriously.

I'm aiming for taking them seriously around mid-August. Once they are in the running to win the AL East at that point, I will take them seriously.

q. Beernerdness: Had the good fortune of drinking Marston's Pedrigree bitter at the cricket match Saturday.

I'm just going to stop here. That beer sounds like dog food. I can't imagine it would be any good.


rich said...

What a concept ... appreciating good play from the opposition.

Here's my problem - Americans do appreciate good play from the opposition. We just don't cheer for the opposing team.

Ask most Giants fans during the last drives of Super Bowl 42 or 46 if they felt comfortable and they'd say no. Because they understand how good Tom Brady is.

Even Phillies fans cheered Ripken when he hit a HR in his last game in Philly.

But Steven Jackson...age 29, and Michael Turner is 30... McCoy will take the last carry of this contract at age 28.

Jackson has declined severely the past two years (from 95 yards/game to 69 to 48).

Turner didn't have more than 93 touches (rush + catch) in his entire time with the Chargers.

McCoy had 195 touches his rookie year, 285 his second year and 321 last year.

I like McCoy a lot (oh wait, I'm Giants fan, I'm not allowed to appreciate his good play) and he's an exception back and I do think he'll be a value every year of his contract...

...but those are some god awful examples.

over the past six years, has been $25.7 million better than Drew Brees, and Tom Brady $14.3 million better.He was coming off serious shoulder reconstruction, and no team was willing to offer him $10 million a year. True.

Manning and Brady are in contracts they earned after they became once in a life time, HOF legend QBs.

Brees just finished a contract he signed after it wasn't even known if he could play football again.

No shit that Manning and Brady made more.

Also note that Manning and Brady signed their deals before a salary cap existed. Big difference there.

But by almost any measure Brees outplayed his contract.

Yes, he outplayed his contract, but that doesn't mean the Saints should overpay him this time.

The Saints got a hell of a deal for a while. Now is the time to pay up.

The problem I have with Brees is that while I think the Saints are lowballing him (slightly), he also does owe the Saints a bit for giving him 60M when it wasn't even sure if he could play.

At the time he signed the deal, it was a huge risk for the Saints. Did it work out for them? Sure, but Brees gladly signed the offer knowing he could potentially outperform the contract. The fact that it worked out to the Saints favor is irrelevant.

Give the man fair market value and if he doesn't like it, then he's being a whiny bitch.

He doesn't have the medical red flag of Manning.

Other than that shoulder injury...

$21 million a year. Looking at the precedents, that's only fair.

I almost did a spit take. What's the 21M? Is that the base or the max value?

Either way, that's a tad much. 19-20M a year (total) is more than fair.

Keep in mind the only QBs with cap hits in that range have a stupid owner (Tony Romo), have multiple rings (Big Ben, Eli, Brady) or is arguably the best to ever play the position (Peyton).

"In the NFL, if you've exhausted your replay reviews, and you see an obviously wrong call, you can't challenge. That's bollocks.''

Except in the final two minutes when it's a booth review. Not to mention that you get a third if you get the first two right.

This is a game with a hour of play time, not five fucking days. I think if you get the third right, you should keep getting challenges, but seriously, when was the last time you saw a coach need more than 2 or 3?

So we waited as Beatles nerd after Beatles nerd did their best John-Ringo-Paul-George imitation.

It's an active roadway and this pisses the locals off to no end. I'm waiting for someone to just plow through them and I will clap with glee.

Quit bringing up logical and relevant points Peter.

I never thought I'd live to see King make a logical point, but he did. Kudos to you Peter.

Bengoodfella said...

Rich, that's a good point. I appreciate the good play of the opposing team, but the way football works is we don't actively cheer for these players.

Oh yeah, there are some bad examples of RB's hitting that wall. I realize McCoy has had a lot of touches, but I do think this is a great contract for both sides. The Eagles seem to be getting max value out of McCoy and even if he declines a bit in the last two years it won't be as bad as other RB's and their decline. RB's just don't seem to hold value for a long period of time.

We all know I haven't been on Brees side through the past few years. He's annoyed me with his Saint Brees act. I do think now is the time for the Saints to pay up. I'm not saying overpay for him or anything such as that. I see the differences in Manning/Brady's contract being signed after they were superstars and Brees' contract reflecting the risk that he was. I understand no other teams wanted to take a risk on him and his contract is probably more than he should/could have gotten.

I guess my point is the Saints should have re-signed Brees a year or two ago and not let it get to this point. They don't need to overpay him, but they let every single penny of that 6 year $60 million deal stand and didn't bother having Brees sign a contract extension. I think he should get what the market bears and no more money for loyalty or past performance. Brees' current performance is fantastic though, so I think the Saints need to realize what Brees is worth and pay him. I simply have the feeling the Saints don't want to pay market value for Brees. I have nothing to base this on other than a feeling, but this deal should have been done a while ago. Of course I dislike the Saints organization as a whole, so I'm probably biased.

$21 million is a bit much probably...unless that's fair market value. We won't know what market value is b/c he has been franchised. I see no reason why a contract of 5 years at $95 million wouldn't work with $40 million of that guaranteed. I have no idea if the Saints have the cap room for that, but still. Brees needs to make sure the Saints have room to put a team around him too.

I agree with you in that I think NFL coaches get two challenges, because that's about how many they will need per game, rather than as a way of decreasing the amount of challenges. I think the NFL replay system works very well, at least in terms of how many challenges coaches get and how a coach has a third challenge if he gets the first two correct.

Again, I don't like Vilma so I am biased. How can you sue the NFL and then have that SI cover as your avatar on Twitter? Ridiculous.

KentAllard said...

My commencement speaker was Ted Turner. He was extremely drunk, and punctuated his comments by throwing a twisted paper clip up in the air and staggering around to catch it. It was awesome.

Bengoodfella said...

Kent, WHAT? Your commencement speaker was the same guy Atlanta Braves fan fondly wish ran the team again so they would spend more money while also pretending he didn't preside over many years where the Braves were awful?

I don't remember my commencement speaker. I know he was white and he was male. That's all I remember. Clearly he made an impact on me and my life. Plus, I was coming down from a massive hangover and had just wanted to get across stage without vomiting. That probably had something to do with my non-remembering his name.